Forum
Comments:
-
- on Fri 05 Dec 2008
- 10:05:57 PM UTC
That can have several
That can have several reasons. First, a site such as a spam blacklist might include that site. A human could also have made that rating. If you think the rating is incorrect, rate it yourself and be sure to leave a comment. In the Support section you'll find a tool to report incorrect ratings.
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 03:40:06 AM UTC
Lying
Just so you know, lying by making three different accounts and leaving multiple comments is not a way to get people to believe you any more. Yes, that's right, I figured it out, because I'm not stupid, like your idea of reversing the reputation of a website is.
Whether you disagree or not, lying is not the answer.
And that lie actually turned me more against believing that small dog is safe, and leaves me to want to rate it UNSAFE.
So please, don't pull this stunt again. You can, and most likely will be banned if you do.
WOT ROCKS!
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 06:04:01 AM UTC
The url, please..?
What is the address of this site? Let us see what we're discussing...
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 06:19:29 AM UTC
URL for Small Dog
www.smalldog.com
They may be small, but they offer great service. They specialize in Apple-related products. -
- on Sun 14 Dec 2008
- 11:57:29 PM UTC
Randomness
Boo apple go microsoft :p
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 06:44:36 AM UTC
pics..?
wehaveitall: "Just so you know, lying by making three different accounts and leaving multiple comments is not a way to get people to believe you any more."
Please, could you document that? I know that bogus reviewers is a real problem - but suspicions aint enuff...
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 10:18:09 AM UTC
@wehaveitall
@wehaveitall: Who did you mean, IndiUnJay or me?
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 03:38:09 PM UTC
Not u
IndiUnJay. Look at the website. It has little popularity, not many ratings. Look at the comments. It has three people with 0 activity score saying it's an unfair reputation. The fact that a website of not much popularity like that, would be rated by three raters on their very first rating is probably less than 0.0001 chance, and it's easy to tell that he made those accounts.
WOT ROCKS!
-
- on Mon 08 Dec 2008
- 05:49:50 AM UTC
Proof..?
Yes, I would also be suspicious here. But suspicions still isn't proof. The probability is very low, indeed, but not zero. So I still think we should 'hold our horses'. This should be investigated - before a conclusion. Not in stead of...
-
- on Sat 06 Dec 2008
- 04:29:21 PM UTC
Confused
Wait a minute . . . wait a minute.
Two questions to clear this up for my tired old eyes (simple answers, please).
Wehaveitall: Who are you saying is lying . . . IndiUnJay or FlyAqua?
Is this Small Dog website trustworthy or not?
I think I know the answers to both questions, but I'd like a confirmation of my understanding.
Unfair Rating for Small Dog Electronics
Today the Small Dog Electronics website had a red WOT rating, meaning someone had said it was unreliable, even dangerous. In all my interactions with Small Dog, and from all reports I have heard from other Mac users, Small Dog has always been a good and reliable vendor. Could someone be purposely lying, to make Small Dog look bad?